4. 4 'Therefore (husband and wife) should eat fast-day food which is pleasant to them.'

5. Let them sleep that night on the ground.

6. They should spend that night so as to alternate their sleep with waking, entertaining themselves with tales or with other discourse.

7. 7 But they should avoid doing anything unholy (such as cohabiting together).

8. It is said, that when on a journey, he should not fast.

9. For (say they, in that case) the observance has to be kept by his wife.

10. Let him do (herein) what he likes.

11. In the same way also one who has set up the (Srauta) fires should fast

12. And (he should observe) what is enjoined by the sacred tradition.

13. Now in the forenoon, after (the sacrificer) has offered his morning oblation, and has walked round the fire on its front side, and strewn to the south of the fire eastward-pointed Darbha grass

14. 14 (The Brahman) stations himself to the east of that (grass), facing the west, and with the thumb and the fourth finger of his left hand he takes one grass blade from the Brahman's seat and throws it away to the south-west, in the intermediate direction (between south and west), with (the words), 'Away has been thrown the dispeller of wealth.'

bolster of Darbha grass, and should return in the same way (in which he has gone to the Brahman's seat), and then should perform the other (duties).

Footnotes

28:1 6, 1. The teacher's name is spelt elsewhere Mânutantavya, which seems to be the more correct spelling. The Khâdira-Grihya (II, I, 5) has Mânadantavya. Dr. Knauer has called attention to several other blunders of the MSS., which are unusually frequent just in this passage. For I have no doubt that in spite of the unanimous agreement of the MSS. we are to change mânushyâhutir into mânushasyâhutir, and I think it very probable, to say the least, that in Sûtra 4 kâmayetaupavasathikam should be corrected into kâmayeyâtâm aupavasathikam, though here the singular could possibly be defended by very faithful believers in the authority of the MSS.

29:14 The ceremonies stated in this Sûtra have to be performed by the Brahman. This is stated in the commentary, and the comparison p. 30 of parallel texts leaves no doubt as to the correctness of this view. Thus Hiranyakesin says (I, 1): etasmin kâle brahmâ yagñopavîtam kritvâpa âkamyâparenâgnim dakshinâtikramya brahmasadanât trinam nirasya, &c. Comp. also the corresponding passages of the Srauta ritual given by Hillebrandt, Neu- and Vollmondsopfer, p. 17. I do not think it probable, however, that we should read brahmâऽsanât, so that it would be distinctly expressed by the text that the Brahman is the subject (comp. Dr. Knauer's Introduction, p. viii). For we read in this same Sûtra brahmâsanât trinam abhisamgrihya; in Sûtra 15, brahmâsana upavisati; in Sûtra 21, brahmâsane nidhâya: of these passages it is in the second made probable by the sense, and it is certain in the third, that brahmâsana is to be understood as a compound equal to brahmasadana. Thus it would, in my opinion, be unnatural not to explain it in the same way also in the first passage. Parâvasu is opposed to Vasu (Sûtra 15) in the same way as some texts, for instance Âpastamba, oppose Parâgvasu to Arvâgvasu.

30:21 'In the same way' refers to the ceremonies stated in Sûtras p. 31 13 and 14. On the darbhakatu or, as some MSS. read, darbhavatu, see Bloomfield's note on the Grihya-samgraha, I, 88. 89. Knauer gives darbhavatum without adding any various readings. Comp. Khâdira-Grihya I, 1, 23.